12.07.2015 Views

Brittle Power- PARTS 1-3 (+Notes) - Natural Capitalism Solutions

Brittle Power- PARTS 1-3 (+Notes) - Natural Capitalism Solutions

Brittle Power- PARTS 1-3 (+Notes) - Natural Capitalism Solutions

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Notes 419the environment in ounce or (conceivably)pound quantities. But highly efficient andprobably superior cells can also be made fromother materials which are usually cheaper andwhich are nontoxic (or have such high meltingand boiling points that it is hard to imaginehow much of them could be dispersed).86 Russell 1982.87 Joint Committee on Defense Production1977:II:45.Notes to Chapter Seventeen1 EMR 1980:65.2 Quoted by Harding 1982, who collatedmost of the data in this paragraph.3 DOE 1981a:9.4 Ibid.:1.5 Ibid.:2.6 Ibid.:13–14.7 Lovins & Lovins 1980a.8 Oil Daily 1981.9 John Geesman, quoted in Harding 1982.10 Omang 1982. Similar trends may emergefrom the revival of dormant utility emergencyplanninggroups set up by the 1950 DefenseAuthorization Act (Inside Energy 1981).11 ERAB 1981:6.12 DOE 1981a.13 Lovins 1981, 1982.14 Los Angeles Times 1982k.15 DCPA 1977:App. G.16 California Energy Commission 1981.17 Energy & Defense Project 1980; Clark &Page 1981.18 Jenkins 1980.19 Energy Consumer 1980b:32–45.20 Los Angeles Energy ManagementAdvisory Board 1981.21 Seib & Harris 1981:1.22 Iklé 1979.23 Brookhaven National Laboratory 1978:1-42.24 California Energy Commission 1981e:22.25 Benson 1981.26 Richards 1982.27 Stayton 1981:9, 16.28 Humboldt County Energy AdvisoryCommittee 1981.29 Data from Professor Al Cassella,Sangamon State University, Springfield,Illinois; see Benson 1981.30 Stanek 1981:30.31 Tsongas 1980.32 Stanek 1981:30.33 Colorado Office of Energy Conservation1981:71.34 E.g., Okagaki & Benson 1979. See alsoGorenflo et al. 1981; Schaefer & Benson 1980;Lovins’s primer in Soft Energy Notes, May 1978;and Randolph 1981.35 Pomerantz et al. 1979; SERI 1980c.36 Tomasi et al. 1981:8.37 Colorado Office of Energy Conservation1980:70.38 Alschuler 1980.39 National League of Cities 1981.40 Randolph 1981; Corbett & Hayden1981; Morris 1980.41 For a short list of barriers and solutions,see Lovins & Lovins 1980:115–119.42 SERI 1980c.43 Corbett & Hayden 1981:960.44 Tomasi et al. 1981:3.45 For example, Los Angeles EnergyManagement Advisory Board 1981. The programdoes not list and exhaust all cost-effectivetechnical options, but it is clearly conceivedand presented.46 Corbett & Hayden 1981:957.47 Tomasi et al. 1981:3–4. Significantly, overtwo-thirds of the jurisdictions surveyed considerenergy costs as a separate line item intheir budgets.48 Pomerantz et al. 1979. (Other barriers andpitfalls are discussed in Soft Energy Notes 1982.)49 Pomerantz et al. 1979. The program hasalso been the subject of two excellent televisionspecials by Bill Moyers. (Purists maypoint out that Franklin County is a netexporter of energy—on paper—because it containsThe Yankee Rowe nuclear plant, whosepower is exported to Berkshire County. Fromthe viewpoint of county residents, however,that does them no good. Most of their energyis oil and comes from outside the county, stateand—usually—country.)50 For example (Clark 1980:99), more thanninety percent of county residents polled in1980 said they had reduced their energy usesince 1974; nearly half used or planned to usewood for heating. Weatherization projects had

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!